"Does Go have enumerated values" seems much like "does Lua have objects". Lua doesn't have `class` or anything like it, it has tables, metatables, and metamethods. But it makes it very easy to use those primitives to create a class and instance pattern, including single inheritance if desired, and it even offers special syntax for defining and calling methods with `:` and `self`. If I had to deliver a verdict, I would say that the special syntax pushes it over the line, and so yeah: with some caveats, Lua has objects.
Same basic thing with Go. One may define a custom integer type, and a set of consts using that type with `iota`, to get something which behaves like plain old small-integer enums. It's possible to undermine this, however, by defining more values of this type, which makes this pattern weaker than it could be, but in a way which is similar to the enums found in C.
Ultimately, Go provides iota, and making enums is the intended purpose of it. If you search for "enums in Go" you'll find many sources describing an identical pattern. So, like `self` and `:` in Lua, I'd say that `iota` in Go means that it has an enumerated type.
But if someone wanted to say "Go doesn't even have enums, you have to roll your own, other languages have an enum keyword", I have a different opinion than that first clause, but there's nothing factually wrong with any of it. I find this sort of "where's the threshold" question less interesting than most.